My exposure to Ruger M77's dates back to their introduction,and once the long action came out I quickly had a 270,30/06,and a 7 Rem Mag.These were original rifles and I can't recall accuracy issues with the early ones.
It was not unusual for special runs to be made and I got a 257 Roberts that I used for a lot of woodchuck hunting here in New England. It was fussy but I found a couple of loads that shot well and used the rifle a lot.These all went west with me druing the 70's and I killed pronghorn out to 400 yards or so, and my biggest mule deer to date near Durango with a 270.
Somewhere in here quality started to slip,and several guys who had grabbed 7x57's complained loud and long....seems the throats were like the Holland Tunnel and bullets had to make long jumps to the lands,and would not shoot, or were very fussy.I hear Wilson barrels were also faulted for the accuracy issues.But one friend put a 7 mag in a synthetic stock and used it on everything out west...another 270 was very accurate.
They started making their own barrels when the Mark II action came out,and on the exact same hammer forging machinery used by Remington and Winchester,sourced out of Germany IIRC;but I have not owned many since then that I remember.I have had a Ruger African that shot well,and a 7 mag that did likewise within the last few years.
The rifles are bomb proof...seems nothing ever breaks,you can't kill them, and like most factory offerings sometimes need tweaking to get them to shoot.I guess in a day and age when shooters expect tiny groups from cheap rifles,they may not get this with a Ruger M77.But they seem to shoot well enough,and I would trust one far more as a hunting rifle to keep trucking under bad conditions than most anything else out there today that comes over the counter.
I'm a M70 guy but,otherwise, for something dependable,for me,over the counter, it would be a Ruger M77 Mark II.
Last edited by BobinNH; 10/15/12.
